- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:34:47 +0100
- To: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
- Cc: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jos de Bruijn writes: > Has the XML schema working group ever considered defining such a > datatype (i.e. strings with language tags)? I don't believe so. > Or would the XML schema working group be interested in developing > such a datatype? I suspect not (but I don't speck for the WG). The guideline the WG has used (not entirely consistently, consider e.g. the dateTime datatype) is that XSDL datatypes are for simplexs, and a string to be understood in a language is probably best understood as a pair. XML provides element/attribute markup for representing pairs, and other things being equal that's what we would recommend. > Alternatively, do you have a different suggestion for representing > literals with language tags? See above -- in my view it's not a property of a literal that it's in a language, rather utterances have properties including medium (spoken/written/...), transcription (a string), language(s). . . I realise this is probably a critique at a level which won't help you in your current predicament. . . ht - -- Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh Half-time member of W3C Team 2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/ [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHDNT3kjnJixAXWBoRAiCaAJ9t1aCq2HTqfwRzCUVkjzJPuDFB5QCfb+YM Xx2r0yD32fupWRp6Zl/9t30= =NG1P -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Wednesday, 10 October 2007 13:35:17 UTC